[techtalk] Bunch of odd messages
rik at kde.org
Sun Mar 26 20:50:07 EST 2000
#if Kelly Lynn Martin
> On Sun, 26 Mar 2000 13:21:53 -0500, "Caitlyn M. Martin" <caitlyn at netferrets.net> said:
> >Gratuitous flaming? In my experience, he is absolutely correct, at
> >least for Gnome and E run together. Crashes and core dumps and seg
> >faults are why I now run KDE and kwm. Gnome/E was, and so far as I
> >know, still is too unstable for me to use on a daily basis.
> >Now, having said that, I do think it is *very* promising, and I am
> >sure they will get the bugs worked out.
Yes, I think so too.
> >IMHO, pointing out that something still has problems and isn't quite
> >polished yet doesn't qualify as "gratuitous flaming".
> It's gratuitous flaming when it's thrown out as a unjustified
> explanation for anomalous problems.
It's not unjustified. Gnome is buggy. That's a fact. Probably 100%
of reasonable-sized software is buggy, that's true too, but Gnome
is more buggy that you'd expect something that has been called
If you can prove to me that Gnome is in fact stable, then I'll
restate my changed opinion.
> Nobody has any legitimate reason to believe that GNOME is responsible
> for Darren's directory ownership problem;
No ? What's this then ?
> As of this morning I'm getting a variety of weird messages, and while
> I'm guessing they're all related somehow, I'm not sure how or why. I'm
> guessing it had something to do with the fact that Gnome didn't quit quite
> right last night for some reason.
If that, combined with the fact that Gnome is buggy, isn't a legitibate
reason to believe that Gnome is somehow responsible, then I don't know
what is, apart from perhaps a big error dialog saying 'Sorry, Gnome
has trashed your home directory's ownership'.
> Rik's insinuation that GNOME is responsible for it is therefore
> gratuitous flaming.
You were wrong, therefore, it is not gratuitous flaming.
> Unfortuately, this has, and apparently continues to be, a problem
> in the "GNOME-KDE" wars,
To me, there is no 'Gnome-KDE war'. I don't see one. I don't know
anyone who works on Gnome. I don't discuss the differences between
KDE and Gnome in public fora.
> although in my experience a lot more of it comes from KDE advocates
> than from GNOME advocates.
Fair enough. But you won't see it from many developers. I'm a developer
and I don't spread FUD about Gnome. If someone tells me their system
is broken and that it looks like Gnome did it, I _will_ point out
to him that it is indeed likely because Gnome is buggy. I'm not going
to censor myself just because of my supposed position in some imaginary
> In any case, I don't want to see it, here or anywhere else.
Neither do it. And I'd rather not be flamed for something I didn't do
> (For the record, I use neither.)
Neither do I. I use Window Maker, zsh, gcc, Vim, sed, automake and
plenty of other things besides, but I don't use any KDE or Gnome
apps, utilities or even icons. I don't like 'integrated desktop
I'm working on KDE because I want to see greater acceptance of UNIX
on the desktop. That's it. I would be just as happy if Gnome lead
UNIX to that goal. I have nothing 'against' the Gnome project, in
fact I'm keen to see it succeed. If you read gnome-kde-list at gnome.org
you'll see that I've been actively encouraging and supporting
collaboration between the KDE and Gnome projects.
Your immediate flamage of someone for stating a fact, assuming that
they're part of some imaginary  'desktop war' is misplaced and at
best annoying. Please try not to be so inflammatory. You're wasting
your time, mine, and that of the list subscribers.
 Yes, imaginary, because I haven't seen it. I've been told that
posters to the slashdot website are known for their FUD and
venomous comments in either direction, but I don't read it
aside from the occasional sarcastic comment posted to
kde-devel at kde.org by Miguel De Icaza, haven't seen any evidence
techtalk mailing list
techtalk at linuxchix.org
More information about the Techtalk